BRUCEDALE – Guelph-Eramosa council will soon have its first Code of Conduct, designed to guide members’ behaviour and allow for the investigation of complaints.
Other Wellington municipalities have had a code for several years, but it will be mandatory as of March 1 as part of revisions to the Municipal Act that will also expand the role of the integrity commissioner.
On Jan. 16, the Guelph-Eramosa strategic planning committee received a draft code from commissioner Guy Giorno, a lawyer who was retained jointly last year by the township, Wellington County and five other local municipalities.
Council will examine the draft and make a decision on its adoption at an upcoming meeting.
In addition to investigating code complaints, the commissioner will now also have the authority to conduct independent investigations into alleged violations of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (MCIA).
Mayor Chris White summed up the code: “It’s two words, ‘Behave yourself.’ My biggest concern is, you just want to make sure the Code of Conduct does not become a political tool, doesn’t become a way to suppress free speech.
“That said, you have to have some basic rules for people – it’s unfortunate that it has come to this stage.”
The code requires members to treat fellow councillors, staff and the public with respect, to maintain the secrecy of confidential information (even after leaving office) and to adhere to the MCIA, declaring any conflicts or monetary interests and removing themselves from any discussion or vote on such matters.
The code also applies to non-council members of municipal committees or boards.
People covered by the code must not use confidential information or their position for personal gain or the benefit of another person. They must not accept gifts or benefits, unless covered by a list of exemptions, and must not use town property for financial gain or advantage.
Members will be able to ask the commissioner for a legal opinion on possible violations of the code or MCIA, and for advice on ethical obligations under the town’s procedures, rules and policies.
‘Frivolous’ complaints
The commissioner can decide not to investigate a complaint that appears to be “frivolous, vexatious or not made in good faith”.
Councillor Corey Woods brought up a hypothetical situation related to the rule that requires members to “act with decorum and engage in respectful conduct” at meetings.
“Let’s say everybody at the table here is fine with swearing. Corey says ‘shit’. There’s nobody in the gallery, but let’s say that now it’s in the paper: ‘Councillor Woods says “shit”’.
“Could somebody reading the paper say, ‘I don’t like Councillor Woods, I want to get him – I’m going to make a Code of Conduct complaint because he said something at a meeting that I wasn’t at’?”
Woods noted there is no list of inappropriate words.
White said the commissioner could be contacted about that situation, but suggested it comes down to good social behaviour. He also noted the chair of a meeting could moderate language used in a discussion.
“If it’s a public setting, you probably don’t want to, unless it slips out, which it does on occasion,” said White.
The draft code says a complaint about conduct at a meeting must be made by someone present at the meeting, and the person should bring their concern to council first if possible.
The commissioner conducts code investigations in secret, with the complainant and defendant providing evidence and arguments privately. The commissioner has access to all municipal records and can get information from other sources. Once the investigation is complete, a public report goes to council.
If the commissioner rules there has been a code violation, council must decide whether to impose a penalty. This can include a reprimand or suspension of pay for up to 90 days.
Council can remove a member of a local board, but they cannot remove an elected councillor from office. They can request reimbursement of monies or the return of property, depending on the case.
No investigation or report can be conducted between nomination day and a municipal election. If an investigation has started, but is not complete as of nomination day, the process is terminated. It cannot be revived unless the complaint is resubmitted after the election.
For complaints about possible MCIA violations, a new provision in the Municipal Act states, “If the commissioner decides to conduct an inquiry, the commissioner may have a public meeting to discuss the inquiry.”
Commissioners will not be able to make a finding of guilt or impose a penalty, but if they believe an MCIA offense has been committed, they can apply directly to a judge for a determination. Previously, only an elector could bring a conflict of interest complaint to the courts.
